Mexico Teeters Between Recent U.S. Friendship and 170 Years of Hostility

Page 1 of 3123>
February 6th, 2017 at 11:18:40 PM permalink
Pacomartin
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 1068
Posts: 12569
Quote: WSJ
Mexico Teeters Between Recent U.S. Friendship and 170 Years of Hostility

Quote: WSJ
Mexico had a closed and struggling economy in the mid-1980s, with little American investment, and most Mexicans viewed the U.S. as their historic enemy.




The recent Wall Street Journal article attempts to put a historical context to the last year. The Mexican War of Independence (September 16, 1810, to September 27, 1821) according to the article was basically followed by 170 years of mistrust of the USA by Mexicans.

President Clinton's response to the Mexican peso crisis of 1994, according to the article, was positively perceived by most Mexicans.

I would say the article is not so much newsworthy as it is influential in summing up the change in relationships.
February 7th, 2017 at 4:44:20 AM permalink
AZDuffman
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 135
Posts: 18204
Americans do not know their history very well. Mexican aggression started a war. Mexico nationalized USA oil interests. Mexican leaders have forever blamed the USA for the problems a corrupt government has brought on the average Mexican. Many Mexicans are still sore at the Mexican Cession.

The current friendship period ending may be historically inevitable.
The President is a fink.
February 7th, 2017 at 4:49:54 AM permalink
Fleastiff
Member since: Oct 27, 2012
Threads: 62
Posts: 7831
I don't know if its a relationship to the US or a relationship to the US Dollar.

Tourists are often well received solely due to tourist dollars. In the Caribbean the phrase "working for the Yankee Dollar" means prostitution. Which of course made women breadwinners rather than their husbands. I don't think US tourists were ever viewed as males corrupting Mexican society, it was more just Tourists bring US Dollars so we let them dress and party as they like to as long as they pay high prices in resorts and shops.

As for industrial investment, I'm not sure of any figures but I do know that many companies lured by low wage special zones get fed up with manana attitudes to work and nickle and dime taxes from local politicians.

Much of the trade figures are skewed by drug trade profits being booked as income to Texas front companies.

I think many people realize that The Wall is a Publicity Issue since Trump can't really scream about Red China or Soviet Menace or Berlin Wall stuff so whats he got left.
Americans don't take him seriously so why should the Mexican people pay any attention to his rants?
February 7th, 2017 at 5:43:57 AM permalink
AZDuffman
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 135
Posts: 18204
Quote: Fleastiff

Tourists are often well received solely due to tourist dollars. In the Caribbean the phrase "working for the Yankee Dollar" means prostitution. Which of course made women breadwinners rather than their husbands. I don't think US tourists were ever viewed as males corrupting Mexican society, it was more just Tourists bring US Dollars so we let them dress and party as they like to as long as they pay high prices in resorts and shops.


They hate Yankees but love the USD. Little different than a Caesars dealer hating the players but loving the tips. But I am sure most Americans who go to Cancun think the way the Mexicans act and treat you there is how the population acts and feels. This does not mean that every Mexican hates the Yanks. But if you leave the tourist areas don't expect the warm feeling everywhere.

Quote:
I think many people realize that The Wall is a Publicity Issue since Trump can't really scream about Red China or Soviet Menace or Berlin Wall stuff so whats he got left.
Americans don't take him seriously so why should the Mexican people pay any attention to his rants?


"The wall" seems to scare Mexico to death. American liberals laugh, saying a wall will not work. Mexico understands that a wall is just part of a larger solution. If Mexico could not offload excess population to the USA and have said population send dollars back, well they have problems. Possibly the difference between crawling out of being a poverty-stricken nation to remaining one.

Just a few changes to make life harder and intolerable to illegal aliens could send and turn many back. That starts to dry up remittances. Then Mexico actually has to really fix their system.
The President is a fink.
February 7th, 2017 at 6:57:29 AM permalink
Nareed
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 346
Posts: 12545
Quote: Pacomartin
The recent Wall Street Journal article attempts to put a historical context to the last year. The Mexican War of Independence (September 16, 1810, to September 27, 1821) according to the article was basically followed by 170 years of mistrust of the USA by Mexicans.


"Poor Mexico. So far from god, so close to the United States." Porfirio Díaz.

Much resentment was formed with the Mexican War mess. Though this involved serious blunders on both sides. Less well-remembered, when it's remembered at all, is the American intervention that kicked Napoleon III's troops out of Mexico, which spelled the end of the comic-opera Second Mexican Empire.
Donald Trump is a one-term LOSER
February 7th, 2017 at 8:08:51 AM permalink
Pacomartin
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 1068
Posts: 12569
Quote: AZDuffman
Americans do not know their history very well. Mexican aggression started a war. Mexico nationalized USA oil interests.


March 1938: President Cárdenas embarked on the expropriation of all oil resources and facilities by the state.
March 1938: Anschluss is the term used to describe the annexation of Austria into Nazi Germany.

I am having trouble following your post. What war was started by Mexico nationalizing USA oil interests? Clearly there was opposition, but no war that I know about


Quote: Wikipedia Mexican oil expropriation International opposition
In retaliation, the oil companies initiated a public relations campaign against Mexico, urging people to stop buying Mexican goods, and lobbying to embargo US technology to Mexico. Many foreign governments closed their markets to Mexican oil, hoping that PEMEX would drown in its own oil. However, the U.S. government of Franklin Delano Roosevelt had issued the Good Neighbor Policy, aiming to recalibrate U.S.-Latin American relations; the U.S. government did not intervene to aid U.S. oil companies affected by the Mexican expropriation. Mexican finances suffered due to the boycott, the Mexican peso was devalued, and an immediate 20% increase in prices was suffered by the Mexican population.

In a trip to NY to negotiate with oil companies, Mexican treasury minister, Suarez, serendipitously met an American intermediate, William Rhodes Davis from Davis Oil Company, who had a refinery in Europe, and asked for a collaboration. Davis mediated between Mexico and Germany to a barter agreement where Mexico would give crude oil to Davis, who then would provide refined oil products to Germany in exchange for machinery to Mexico.

By 1940, Mexico had an agreement with the American Sinclair Oil Corporation to sell crude oil to the U.S, and the full-scale war in Europe guaranteed that Mexican oil would have international customers. PEMEX developed into one of the largest oil companies in the world and helped Mexico become the world's seventh largest oil exporter.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexican_oil_expropriation


In the aftermath of the USA war on independence, the North American economy relied on the Spanish thaler (or dollar) which could be broken into 8 bits. New York did not surpass 50K people until 1800 (dwarfed by Mexico City). The Mexican war of independence declared in 1810 was devastating on the economy and the population hardly grew for three decades as millions died.

The US war of independence was not particularly violent as such wars usually are, and the population essentially soared. By 1830 NYC topped 200,000 and was the largest metropolis in North America surpassing Mexico City.

The Adams–Onís Treaty of 1819 ceded Florida to the U.S. In eastern Texas 20,000 settlers and 1,000 slaves outnumbered the 5,000 Mexicans in the area by 1830.

Mexican population
5.765 million 1803
6.434 million 1831
7.485 million 1850

USA population
5.308 million 1800
12.860 million 1830
23.192 million 1850

If countries went to war before the Industrial Revolution population size counted for a lot. It was much easier to draw your army from a population three times the size.
February 7th, 2017 at 8:33:41 AM permalink
AZDuffman
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 135
Posts: 18204
Quote: Pacomartin
March 1938: President Cárdenas embarked on the expropriation of all oil resources and facilities by the state.
March 1938: Anschluss is the term used to describe the annexation of Austria into Nazi Germany.

I am having trouble following your post. What war was started by Mexico nationalizing USA oil interests? Clearly there was opposition, but no war that I know about


Sorry if that is my fault. The Mexican Revolution nationalized oil for the Mexican people, 1913-1914. The USA did have troops in Mexico earlier to hunt Pancho Vila, where George Patton saw some of his first "combat" if you want to call it that. But the Revolution was pretty much internal.

Today the Mexican oil industry is topping out. They need outside expertise, but their constitution prevents any kind of production-sharing agreement. They could just hire someone to do the work, but that is expensive and might not pay off. All that oil money, lost to corruption and inefficiency.
The President is a fink.
February 7th, 2017 at 8:57:49 AM permalink
Pacomartin
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 1068
Posts: 12569
Quote: AZDuffman
The Mexican Revolution nationalized oil for the Mexican people, 1913-1914. The USA did have troops in Mexico earlier to hunt Pancho Vila, where George Patton saw some of his first "combat" if you want to call it that. But the Revolution was pretty much internal.


I assume you are correct, but that was very early in Mexican oil production. The clause that permitted nationalization of oil was written into the 1917 constitution, but it was not acted on for 21 years. Cribbing some notes from Wikipedia about the period.

Quote: Wikipedia - relevant articles of US/Mexico conflicts during the Mexican revolution

The United States occupation of Veracruz began with the Battle of Veracruz and lasted for seven months, as a response to the Tampico Affair of April 9, 1914 which was set off when nine American sailors were arrested by the Mexican government for entering off-limit areas in Tampico, Tamaulipas. The incident came in the midst of poor diplomatic relations between Mexico and the United States, and was related to the ongoing Mexican Revolution.

In March 1916 Mexican forces loyal to Pancho Villa crossed into New Mexico and raided the border town of Columbus (3 miles north of the border). In response, the U.S. launched a punitive expedition into Mexico against Villa. In mid-April, Patton asked Pershing for the opportunity to command troops, and was attached to Troop C of the 13th Cavalry to assist in the manhunt for Villa and his subordinates.The foray garnered Patton widespread media attention as a "bandit killer". He returned from the expedition permanently in February 1917.

July 1908, British entrepreneur Weetman Pearson struck oil in San Diego de la Mar. Mexico became an oil exporting nation in 1911, with the first shipment leaving the Gulf Coast port of Tampico. Article 27 of the constitution of 1917 granted the Mexican government the permanent and complete rights to all subsoil resources. This would cause conflicts between the Mexican government and foreign companies, and “lay basis for a twenty-one-year struggle” between Mexico and foreign oil companies.

U.S. President Woodrow Wilson considered another military invasion of Veracruz and Tampico in 1917-1918, so as to take control of Tehuantepec Isthmus and Tampico oil fields, but this time the new Mexican President Venustiano Carranza gave the order to destroy the oil fields in case the Marines tried to land there.
February 7th, 2017 at 10:29:15 AM permalink
Fleastiff
Member since: Oct 27, 2012
Threads: 62
Posts: 7831
I think we should always remember that The War of Jenkin's Ear had nothing to do with Able Seaman Jenkins or his ear. It was an excuse.

I have no idea what the excuses are in Mexican history but I fear that drunken Marines played about as much of a role as did Jenkins.

Two Mexican border guards crossed the beach near San Diego lured by blond hair and well-displayed female bodies, the USA termed it an Invasion since they brought their rifles with them. Diplomats have a way of getting carried away. Perhaps Mexicans do also.
February 7th, 2017 at 1:45:43 PM permalink
Pacomartin
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 1068
Posts: 12569
Quote: Fleastiff
I have no idea what the excuses are in Mexican history but I fear that drunken Marines played about as much of a role as did Jenkins.


They weren't drunk. The incident started with a relatively minor incident. A hundred years ago, unlike today, the men seemed to not be able to understand a word of each other's language. The total lack of communication exacerbated the incident.

The gunboat Dolphin, one of the few U.S. Navy vessels able to sail up the Pánuco river through the shallow harbor entrance, by request of the Mexican government had presented a 21-gun salute to the Mexican flag three times on April 2, 1914, to pay tribute to the celebrated occupation of Puebla in 1867 by Mexican General Porfirio Díaz in the last phases of the war to expel the forces supporting the French intervention in Mexico.

The commander of the Dolphin had tasked a purser and eight sailors with the purchase and pickup of urgently needed 440 gallons of gasoline fuel from a dealer located near a tense defensive position at Iturbide Bridge being held by Huerta's forces.

The defenders of the bridge anticipated an attack, following skirmishes with Constitutionalist forces on the two preceding days. The Mexicans raised their rifles to the Americans, including the sailors still on the boat, and forcibly escorted them to the police headquarters for questioning. Although the sailors had been released after only a few minutes, Rear Admiral Henry T. Mayo, the commander of U.S. naval forces in the area, demanded a 21-gun salute and formal apology from Huerta's government. General Huerta, the President of Mexico, refused to have his forces raise the U.S. flag on Mexican soil to provide a 21-gun salute.
Page 1 of 3123>